Monday, November 10, 2014

9/11, Deja Vu, and "The Matrix"

I have used the "Matrix" movie analogy in a previous article with regards to the events of 9/11, and I'm afraid that I have once again succumbed to the temptation to use it for this post.

It is perhaps a far from perfect analogy [i.e. yes, I'm fully aware that the movie has its faults], however, because of its broad popularity and appeal, and because a lot of people reading an article such as this are probably familiar with the original movie "The Matrix" and various scenes in it, I feel it can come in handy as an easy way of graphically illustrating points I am attempting to make about the alleged events of 9/11.

The "Deja-Vu-Cat-Warning" Scene in "The Matrix" Movie

In the movie, there is a scene where the hero, Neo, spots, out of the corner of his eye, a cat walking slowly across an open doorway.

A moment later, for some reason he again looks back at the doorway and sees an identical cat doing the exact same thing.

He mentions these two strangely coincident "deja vu" events to the people he's with at the time, and they immediately start to interrogate him to try to find out whether the two cats he claims to have witnessed were identical, or merely similar.

They all conclude that the two events were in fact identical, and that this is a sign of what is called "a glitch" in "the matrix", and is a CLEAR WARNING SIGN that Neo's group is not experiencing reality, but instead, a simulated reality, and that Neo's cat deja vu experience was an unintended indication of a trap [i.e a technical error- a "glitch"], set by the controllers of the matrix [artificial intelligence machines].

Well, just as the cat in the Matrix movie makes the exact same journey twice within a matter of seconds, on 9/11 Flight 175 [i.e the 9/11 "cat" ] apparently made its very own identical journey into WTC2 twice within a 3 second time frame, "live" on nationally broadcast TV!

Don't believe me?

Probably not, at this point in time, and so, a question for you, dear reader:

if the on-line archived mainstream media [MSM] video records for the morning of September 11th, 2001 are in fact all accurate, and are all genuine real-time records of what happened, as recorded live by those five networks [ ABC,CBS, CNN, Fox, NBC] that morning, [as most still claim], then why does the impact of Flight 175 into the South Tower [WTC2] occur at two distinct times, 3 seconds apart, on a minimum of at least 3 out of the 5 separate MSM networks, according to those very same alleged recorded live-in-real-time on line archives?

In other words, why is it that the impact and resulting fireball of Fl. 175's impact on CBS's "live" archived footage happens when it does, when, according to those very same on-line archived video records for ABC and CNN, at the exact same moment in time as CBS's post impact fireball makes its on-screen debut, Flight 175's image is still to be quite clearly seen in full flight, prior to impact, and similarly, on ABC and other networks the resultant fireball does not commence until around about a full 3 seconds after the CBS fireball makes its appearance on-screen ? :

I submit that this anomaly is in actual fact a "real world" replication of the deja vu cat scene from "The Matrix" movie - an indication [ or warning, or a "dead give-away" if you will] that what you were viewing on the morning of 9/11 was not reality as it happened in Manhattan , NYC, but in fact a simulated reality consisting of at least 2 different pre-fabricated movies that were being simultaneously broadcast on all 5 MSM networks on the morning of 9/11.

However, I Ain't That Stoopid

However, I am not foolish enough to believe that you would believe my above claim, based solely on the two screen shots I have provided so far, above [Figs 1 &2], neither of which even have a clearly visible, accurate to the second, network time stamp.

The two images below [Figs 3 and 4] are screen shots taken from 9/11 researcher Simon Shack's "Synched Out"analysis of the on-line archived MSM video records, for the 11 minute period, 8.52 am through 9.03 am, on the morning of Sept.11th 2001, for the US mainstream media [MSM] networks ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, and NBC:

Fig. 3 . Screen shot detail [@5:41]from Simon Shack's "Synched Out" analysis of the 5 MSM network broadcasts [when run simultaneously], for the morning of 9/11. Plane-strike fireball has just started to "bloom" on CBS,[see lower left corner of upper right quadrant], therefor Fl.175 has already struck WTC2 on CBS. Meanwhile, on ABC,[upper left quadrant], the plane [white arrow in upper left ABC quadrant]] is still in flight.

Fig.4 : Plane still in flight on ABC and CNN- Screen shot detail [@5:47] from Simon Shack's "Synched Out" analysis of the 5 simultaneous MSM network broadcasts for the morning of 9/11. The plane is still clearly in the air on ABC [top left quadrant], and on CNN [small sq. lower center] while on CBS [upper right quadrant], the post-strike fireball continues to spread, indicating that Flight 175 has already hit WTC2 on CBS.

What he did was download the on line archived records of those 5 networks broadcasts, and then start them all from the exact same point in time , and run them all simultaneously, on a multi-split screen, at double speed, to see how they compared to each other when so run, right next to each other on screen, where they could be easily compared.

Mr Shack's analysis clearly shows that when these segments of the archived footage for that particular time period are run simultaneously, [i.e. "in synch" with each other], that the plane strike occurs at different times on different networks, when obviously, if the networks were all really broadcasting live, with no time delay [which,to this day, is what they all apparently claim to have done ], then they would all show the plane strike occurring at the exact same time, and the resultant fireball would also match network to network in duration and other salient details .

Proof That The "Live" 9/11 Network Imagery Was All Fake?

For myself and a [very] few others, this huge, 3 second discrepancy within the imagery of the various MSM broadcast feeds is proof positive that those feeds were actually pre-fabricated [i.e. made on computer beforehand] videos that were then fraudulently broadcast as live imagery that morning.

Objections To Mr Shack's and My Own Assertion- Mandatory F.C.C. Time Delays?

On showing the last part of "Synched Out" to an interested member of The Freedom Network at a recent meeting, the reviewer commented that the discrepancy in the timing of the plane strike was probably due to the F.C.C.'s mandatory time delay in force for all live broadcasts [ supposedly enforced so that , amongst other things, bad language can be removed before it goes out "live" on the air].

At first I though that that person had a legitimate point [about F.C.C. regulations requiring a delay], but on consideration I don't believe they really do, because:

1] If there was a time delay, wouldn't all networks use the exact same [mandatory] delay, so that even if on delay, they'd all still be in synch?

2] To this day, there is no proof that the networks actually were on any automatic time delay that morning. None of the networks to date have ever disputed the accuracy of the times given for each of the broadcast segments for their individual networks as archived.

Meaning all networks have apparently agreed to date that the on-line archived records for their particular station are accurate historical records of what they broadcast live that morning, including displayed times given for those individual network broadcasts.

And let's not forget, the various times recorded for both the 2nd hit [fl.175] and the collapse of the towers themselves by those 5 MSM networks, all match the official times given for those events in all of the official government accounts of events that day.

How Else To Prove Pre- Fl. 175 Strike On-Air Network Synchronicity ?

There are two possible ways I see of establishing that the video segments analysed by Mr Shack are actually running "in synch" prior to the 2nd. hit.

1] An individual could go to the on-line archives and check that the sections shown in Mr Shack's analysis actually have the exact same 8.52 am EST start point in those archives as he has used in his own analysis, for the stations concerned.

If you know how, you could probably even download the sections concerned and make your own video in the same manner as Mr Shack has done , so that all 5 network broadcasts can be viewed simultaneously in a suitable video software editor program.

2] You could carefully review Simon Shack's entire "Synched Out" movie [it's slightly under 8 minutes long], to check to see if there are any obvious clues to none-synchronicity of all stations concerned occurred prior to the out of synch by 3 secs. 2nd. plane hit.

This [2] , is what I decided to do.

An Obvious [Ad Nauseum] Sign of Inter- Network Synchronicity?

On checking for network synchronicity prior to the plane strike, I found many instances that suggest that prior to that strike, all networks were perfectly in synch.

Actually, it is one specific sign, repeated "ad nauseum", as it were.

That specific sign being two or more networks displaying the exact same images, at the exact same time, within their own supposedly individually unique "independent" broadcasts.

For just one glaring example:

Fig. 5: From Simon Shack's "Synched Out"- ABC, CBS, Fox,NBC display the same feed at the same time.

An Obvious, Related, Question: The Exact Same Feeds On Competing Networks - How Come?

That question being, why on earth were supposedly rival, competing commercial TV networks repeatedly showing the exact same images on the morning of 9/11?

Please understand, my analysis was by no means exhaustive, if you undertake your own review I'm certain that you will be able to find more instances where the feeds over that 11 minute time frame [8.52 am -9.03 am] are remarkably similar, if not identical.

6 comments:

However, all of this extra information is not even necessary. It's just beating a dead horse expecting people like Fetzer and Baker and Wood to suddenly see 'the light.' They will NEVER come around until they are literally FORCED TO in order to cover their asses because they were never there for that in the first place. They're there to obscure the facts and marginalize them for as long as possible to as small a group as possible, as they have done successfully and only as a final and last resort to come clean in order to save their own asses from prison time in the case of unknown and unpredicted factors not accounted for erupting into a revolution.

Clues Forum has around a thousand members but only maybe 30 regular posters and Shack's channel only 5200 subs on you tube after 7 years. A completely pointless video speculating whether Stevie Wonder is really blind or not (yes, you heard that right, this is the kind of earth-shattering information Abirato's gang are busy, lol) received more views than September Clues in a matter of weeks!

At first I thought why don't they use the popularity of this video to advertise September Clues and September Clues Addendum in the beginning of the video, the two must-see films on 9-11, but on second thought I was glad they didn't associate silly, speculative and completely irrelevant stuff like this with September Clues. They have enough problems as it is. If a hundred Clues Forums popped up tomorrow, they would still be 77 times smaller than Alex Jones with his humungous 920,000 you tube subs. That's how fucked-up things are and how completely gatekept and marginalized. They have really done a job on us, total divide and conquer from the word go, all pre-planned.

Jones himself is small fry compared to the next level of gatekeepers like the Young Turds liberal gatekeeping crew with 1.8 million subs and so on.

Question: When in all of history has anyone ever seen a top-down collapse of a building into its own footprint?

The answer: Never. There have been any top-down collapses of any buildings, by controlled-demolition or otherwise. The foundation of the building, which is always on the bottom has to be destroyed first.

Therefore, if you see TWO top-down collapses on video on the same day and there have NEVER been any top-down collapses in history, the very first thing that you should call into question is THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE IMAGES you just saw. The very first thing any proper scientific or criminal investigation would have to do is examine the images which purport to show something that has never happened before in history outside of Hollywood predictive programming special-effects/CGI flicks like "Independence Day."

What would you call someone who writes an entire book WITHOUT even bothering to establish the authenticity of the images which puport to represent the event, criminal or otherwise, which the entire chain-of-logic of the book is built upon?

As UNSCIENTIFIC as it is possible to be.

So the entire Ace 'fake-suicide' Baker and Judy 'Hutchison Effect' Wood and their fake fighting charade with each-other and with Jim 'Willie Rodriguez-is-an-honest-guy-because-I-had-dinner-with-him / holograms' Fetzer is already exposed right there. They wouldn't get past that in any proper court even BEFORE all of Shack's proofs of video fakery.

Why did they FAKE the collapse videos to show TOP-DOWN collapses which have never happened in the history of the world?

Because, according to the narrative coming to the peons from enemy propaganda and the single most untrustworthy source of information in the universe, the mainstream media, the so-called 'Hi-jacked PLANES' are supposed to have caused the collapse of the two buildings and these 'planes' hit near the top of the building. Therefore, as Shack has repeated a hundred times, according to the absurd logic of their pre-manufactured narrative, the pre-manufactured video has to show a TOP-DOWN collapse.

By making the top-down collpase a 'dustification' or pulverization, again on FAKED VIDEO, the perps can then have a shill like Judy Wood offer a 'scientific' explanation of it by examining a bunch of INAUTHENTICATED images and video, completely ignoring proper criminal procedure and scientific method, and postulating DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS as the cause of it. lol

Question: Has anyone ever seen Directed Energy Weapons?

Answer: No. There is no solid proof that any kind of DEW has ever existed and examining a bunch of OBVIOUSLY FAKED images of impossible 'top-down' collapses from 9-11 to postulate their existence without the slightest attempt at authentication outside of tracing them to this-or-that so-called photographer set-up to take fraudulent credit for them outside of a court of law and penalties of perjury is as absurd and unscientific as it is possible to get. Of course, the very absurdities of Wood's research provide the fodder for their other major shills Fetzer and Baker to establish a bit of 'street cred' by 'debunking' the ridiculous Hutchison effect WITHOUT ever mentioning the obvious violation of proper scientific method in NOT examining the images which should be clear to any moron, never mind so-called 'experts' with 50 years experience NOT solving JFK's murder. lol

So, the answer to all the endless people of challenged mentalities who still cannot fathom the simple reason why the building collapses were also faked is: In order to show a TOP-DOWN collapse due to the impact of the so-called 'planes.'

The reason why the collapse of building 7, given as a red herring only to the alternative community and not to mainstream-media watchers who didn't pay very lose attention, was, again, FAKED as a 'regular' demolition, is simply because it was never hit by a plane in their narrative.

The cockamamie reason given for the collapse of that building was out-of-control fires and 'saving lives' and whatnot and Silverstein even went on fully-controlled PBS and admitted to pulling the building. The reason for this was to give CREDENCE, not just to the authenticity of the 9-11 imagery but to bamboozle the public to think that reporters were on-the-scene reporting this event 'live.' They were not. The ENTIRE 102 minute event was pre-manufactured on video LIKE A DOCUMENTARY STYLE MOVIE, complete with FAKE firefighters and paramedics and all the rest. The real paramedics and firefigthers were left out-of-the-loop altogether and ASSUMED the job was already well taken-care of by the ones they could see on their boob-tube, just like the rest of us TV-baby peons.

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.” ― Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes

In the case of most of these 9-11 gatekeepers, it is not a capital mistake but a capital deliberate 'mistake.' They theorize BEFORE they have data DELIBERATELY in order to make everything believable and nothing knowable, since without DATA and FACTS, there can be no knowables and only fantasy, what is PERCEIVED to be true but is not.

“It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true.” - Henry Kissinger

"A hallucination is a fact, not an error; what is erroneous is a judgment based upon it." ~ Bertrand Russell

"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." - Leo Tolstoy

"The character of a gentleman [I take it] may be explained nearly thus: A blackguard is a fellow who does not care whom he offends; a clown is a blockhead who does not know when he offends; A gentleman is one who understands and shows every mark of deference to the claims of self-love in others, and exacts it in return from them." -- William Hazlitt, in The Ideal of a Gentleman: Or, A Mirror for Gentlefolks, a Portrayal in ..., p.65

“But you cannot go on 'explaining away' for ever: you will find that you have explained explanation itself away. You cannot go on 'seeing through' things for ever. The whole point of seeing through something is to see something through it. It is good that the window should be transparent, because the street or garden beyond it is opaque. How if you saw through the garden too? It is no use trying to 'see through' first principles. If you see through everything, then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To 'see through' all things is the same as not to see.” ~ C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man

"A return to first principles in a republic is sometimes caused by the simple virtues of one man. His good example has such an influence that the good men strive to imitate him, and the wicked are ashamed to lead a life so contrary to his example." -- Niccolo Machiavelli

“Every idea that is a true idea has a form, and is capable of many forms. The variety of forms of which it is capable determines the value of the idea. So by way of ideas, and your mastery of them in relation to what you are doing, will come your value as an architect to your society and future." -- "Idea and Essence" September 7, 1958 ― Frank Lloyd Wright

Yes, I agree that "waking people up" is probably a fruitless task.[ I don't think its entirely impossible however, to "wake up" a few].

Having said that, I believe that it is far more important for the individual to concentrate their valuable time/efforts on freeing themselves from "the matrix" _first_, instead of first trying to free others.

Once the individual is free, _then_ perhaps get into "waking others up".